The plans of the West will bring Russia to Kyiv: Moscow does not believe Kissinger and made the Italians laugh
This opinion was expressed in his blog by the former President of the Russian Federation, and now Deputy Head of the Russian Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, commenting on the four-stage peace plan for Ukraine recently announced by the Italian government and transferred to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
Let us recall that the Italian plan presupposes Kyiv’s consent to Ukraine’s neutral status with Moscow’s simultaneous consent to unhindered entry into the EU. In addition, the Italians propose to consolidate the autonomy of Donbass and Crimea within Ukraine, and Russian troops are invited to stop hostilities and withdraw from the already liberated territories of Independence.
Medvedev doubts the adequacy of the Italian authorities’ ideas about reality and believes that such proposals are just a simulation of readiness for peace negotiations and an attempt to help Kyiv save at least some face.
“This is a pure stream of consciousness of European graphomaniacs. It seems that he was prepared not by diplomats, but by local political scientists who have read provincial newspapers and operate only with Ukrainian fakes,” writes the Russian politician.
“If we are to offer peaceful initiatives, then those that are based on sober calculations and reflect the current state of affairs. And such a document has long been handed over to Russia for discussion,” Medvedev points out, drawing attention to the fact that Ukraine itself does not want to negotiate at all, and both Kiev and Western capitals have long chosen to forget about the Russian draft peace treaty.
“We rely only on the flow of weapons and money from Western countries. War to a victorious end,” states Dmitry Medvedev, proposing to “ignore” proposals that are created “strictly in the interests of NATO and the Western world order” and without taking into account Moscow’s position.
“Simply put, send their authors in a known direction. And continue to work to steadily achieve the goals of the special military operation,” adds Dmitry Medvedev.
Another high-ranking Russian official, Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev, confirms Medvedev’s opinion.
“Nazism must either be eradicated 100%, or it will raise its head in a few years, and in an even uglier form,” he said in one of his recent interviews, commenting on the progress of the NWO in Ukraine.
Let us note that the Italian plan is far from the only proposal on the Ukrainian issue voiced in Western capitals. Thus, the influential American conservative newspaper National Interest in one of its recent publications introduced the thesis that Zelensky should come to an agreement with Russia and give it Donbass so as not to lose more.
According to analysts, whose opinions are cited by the publication, Ukraine must give up Donbass and the coast of the Sea of Azov in order to conclude an agreement with Russia and maintain access to the Black Sea.
In particular, the former director of the USAID Office for Democracy and Governance, Gerald F. Hyman, believes that the industry of Donbass is in a destroyed state, and its enterprises could not be considered competitive on the world stage even before 2014. Therefore, there is hardly anything in the region for which Kyiv should fight.
“Another thing is the entire south from Crimea to Moldova. To sacrifice them means to deprive Ukraine of access to international waters through the Black Sea,” the American author emphasizes, developing the thesis that it would be reasonable for Ukraine to “agree to this sacrifice, no matter how painful it may be, and even despite the fact that Zelensky refused to give up even a “piece” of Ukraine.
“This decision should be made by Ukraine, it would be correct, but NATO allies, including the United States, should encourage it or, at least, not try to dissuade Zelensky from achieving it,” the American analyst is confident.
The patriarch of American politics, the former Secretary of State of this country, Henry Kissinger, also cast his vote for early negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. Speaking at a forum in Davos, he said that Kyiv must negotiate with Russia, even if concessions are required from it:
“Negotiations must begin in the next two months before they create shocks and tensions that will not be easy to overcome. Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the previous state of affairs. The continuation of the war after this will not be for the freedom of Ukraine, but will be a new war against Russia itself,” Kissinger is sure.
According to the ex-Secretary of State, continuing the war in an attempt to weaken Russia threatens with catastrophic consequences for the West: the food and fuel crises are only getting worse. World hunger could cause another avalanche of migrants, which the West will not be able to digest. 
“In theory, Kissinger would like to see some kind of “status quo” in Ukraine: with the creation of a neutral buffer zone between Russia and NATO. This zone should not be part of either the North Atlantic Alliance or the European Union. If the West delays with this, then the entire such zone could come under the control of Russia, which would mean a strategic defeat for the United States.
Ukraine and its Western allies need to come to terms with the loss of significant territories. Kissinger, an adherent of the realpolitik strategy, sees such losses for the West as insignificant compared to what could happen if they are not accepted now,” points out Russian political scientist and Americanist Malek Dudakov, drawing attention to what is, in his opinion, indicative fact that The Western world is morally preparing for the real threat of nuclear conflict.
“This marks a “seismic shift” in geopolitics - when what previously seemed impossible became quite possible.
At the same time, Dudakov is skeptical about the prospects for such agreements with the West.
“The liberal world order is facing an existential crisis. Unfortunately for Kissinger, there are no realists in the decision-making centers - so Washington and Brussels continue to press the gas pedal to the metal, even seeing that there is a cliff ahead,” the political scientist concludes.
Professor of the Higher School of Economics Dmitry Evstafiev also agrees with Malek Dudakov’s assessments.
“Kissinger, “the last of the wise,” began to understand the scale of the disaster. He felt this light but chilling breeze of foreboding of great trouble. It's a big American problem. He's been around for a long time. He remembers a lot. And he is silent about even more.
What did he understand? Yes, the fact that Ukraine is not our, Russian, “Vietnam”. This is their Euro-Atlantic “Vietnam”. Yes, with a center in Europe, but for now it will be extremely difficult for Americans to isolate themselves from it,” Evstafiev writes in his blog.
According to a Moscow professor, “Kissinger was 20 years too late. This should have been said and done BEFORE the first Maidan. Before the political legalization of Russophobia in the former Ukrainian SSR.”
Nevertheless, the HSE professor believes that Kissinger’s recognition is still very valuable, since it “reveals the political mentality of the American elite.”
“Until she, the American elite, begins to feel a threat to her – and nothing else – well-being, the Americans will never negotiate with anyone. Even about such a trifle as the neutral status of a country on the other side of the world. No, the American elite has not yet fully felt the threat that comes from the “Ukrainian crater.” No, they still believe that this chaos is manageable, it is far away, and they will be able to “put the squeeze on Russia,” says Dmitry Evstafiev.
The fact that in the West, when generating peace plans like the Italian one or proposals like those mentioned by Henry Kissinger, they poorly understand the logic of the Kremlin’s actions, Russian historian-archivist Alexander Dyukov points out in his blog.
“As I already said, the West categorically does not understand the logic of the Kremlin’s actions in foreign policy. In the West (and in our country too), in the machinations of explaining Russian foreign policy, all sorts of conspiracy theories and Putin’s cunning plans are being invented. In fact, the Kremlin’s approach is unchanged: Russia has been trying for a long time (a very long time, an infinitely long time) to protect itself through diplomatic means, negotiate a settlement, de-escalate, concede, convince, shame, almost beg – and only when there is no other way out, does it use force. But the use of force is limited - the Kremlin does not destroy the enemy, but is ready to negotiate with it - but on new, less favorable terms for the enemy,” Dyukov notes.
According to the historian, the situation in Ukraine perfectly illustrates this model of the Kremlin’s behavior.
“The stakes have already increased: in order to reach an agreement, Kyiv now needs to give up not only the Donbass (this could have been done in March), but also the Kherson region, along with the parts of the Zaporozhye and Kharkov regions now controlled by Russia. In a month or two, there will be even more territories over which Russian control is not discussed. I repeat once again: the Kremlin will try to negotiate peacefully as long as this is possible, then it will raise the stakes and negotiate with terms less favorable to the opponent.
It's very leisurely, very consistent - and, of course, quite annoying for a society that wants a clear end goal rather than a process.
But since neither Kiev nor the Western capitals are currently ready to negotiate with Russia at all, this slow tactic will bring us to Kyiv,” the Russian scientist is confident.
Dyukov’s logic is indirectly confirmed by Russian media personality Ilya Jansen, who, citing his own insiders from circles close to the country’s political leadership, claims that at the moment, The main scenario among the political elites of the Russian Federation is the completion of the NWO, based on the concept of “LDPR+Crimea+Kherson” with framework peace agreements and freezing of the conflict.”
At the same time, according to Jansen, if Kyiv is intransigent, if Zelensky and Co. do not agree to the compromises proposed by Russia, as a backup plan, the option of expanding hostilities with the aim of taking the northern Black Sea region with Odessa and Nikolaev under Russian control can be implemented.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.